The Race Between African Regulators and Betting Innovation

For decades, the African gaming landscape operated largely in the shadows as neighbourhood pool houses, informal betting slips, and unregulated street corners were witnessing a fast and fundamental change, writes Iyke Bede

Today, that picture has fundamentally shifted. Governments across the continent have successfully pulled the sector into the formal economy, establishing tax frameworks, digital monitoring systems, and dedicated licensing boards.

However, now that the structures of formalisation are in place, a new and more complex problem has emerged: regulators are stuck in a defensive crouch. While they have mastered the basics of licensing, they are notably lacking in proactivity. They are reacting to a market that is already ten steps ahead, rather than defining its direction.

This lack of proactivity is often blamed on the sheer speed of the sector’s growth. Robin Bennett, who heads Regulatory Compliance at the Western Cape Gambling and Racing Board, observes that the rapid expansion of online betting has created massive constraints for those trying to stay ahead. In South Africa—one of the continent’s most mature markets—the challenge is no longer about bringing operators into the fold, but managing the explosion of digital access.

With many jurisdictions issuing a limitless number of licences to satisfy immediate revenue targets, the sheer scale of the market is becoming daunting. Bennett points out a sobering reality for any government body: the technology used by operators is usually miles ahead of the regulations. Whether it is high-frequency betting algorithms or the integration of complex digital payment systems, regulators are often forced to write laws for technologies they don’t fully understand.

This sentiment is echoed by Gossy Ukanwoke, Managing Director of KingMakers. He notes that innovation naturally outruns the rulebook, particularly in the critical areas of responsible gaming and player protection.

In an era where data can predict a punter’s next move before they make it, the ethical guardrails are lagging behind the commercial ones. While operators like KingMakers may implement their own measures to guide customers, Ukanwoke argues that regulators must set the pace.

“One area that I see is that regulations have to catch up on innovation as it concerns responsible gaming and player protection,” Ukanwoke says. “Operators will do what they will have to do to push punters to take the right steps. Regulators have to set the pace ahead of us — to tell us how to protect punters where we operate.”

As the conversation moves toward a more integrated African market, the question of harmonising standards becomes a central theme. Bennett raises the vital question of whether harmonising standards across the continent is a reality or a pipe dream.

The logic for a unified front is sound: a single set of standards would make it easier for African “sovereign” brands to scale across borders without having to navigate 54 different sets of rules. However, Bennett suggests that many jurisdictions must first get things right within their own borders.

Before we can talk about a pan-African gaming standard, individual states must solve their own issues with data privacy, money laundering, and underage gambling. While he acknowledges that collaboration is the only way forward, he remains firm that such partnerships must not compromise the sovereignty of individual jurisdiction. A jurisdiction must be able to collaborate without losing its power to make local decisions that reflect its unique social and economic pressures.

In Ghana, Emmanuel Quainoo, the Acting Gaming Commissioner, believes the solution to the proactivity problem lies in better data and tighter relationships. He advocates for regulators to engage directly with punters to understand their behaviour—moving beyond the boardroom and into the betting shops to see how people actually interact with the product.

He calls for a strong coordination loop between the operators and those who watch over them. This coordination is especially vital as African nations face increasing international pressure to tighten controls against financial crimes. A proactive regulator is one that understands the psychology of the gambler and the flow of the money simultaneously.

The fight against the illegal market remains another major hurdle. For Bennett, being proactive means cutting off the oxygen to unlicensed players. In the past, regulators would simply issue fines to illegal operators—a cost of business that many were happy to pay. Bennett’s proposed strategy is far more aggressive and targets the business’s infrastructure. He suggests preventing illegal brands from signing sponsorship deals with sports teams or local celebrities and moving to physically or digitally lock up their operations entirely.

As these markets formalise, the risk of “regulatory overreach” becomes a genuine threat to the industry’s survival. Jean Mushimire, Executive Director of the Rwanda Gaming Association, acknowledges that while formalisation is a positive step across Africa, it often comes with a sting in the tail: punitive taxation. In some regions, the government has often viewed the gaming sector as an easy tax goldmine, leading to tax rates that drive operators back into the informal, unregulated market.

Mushimire warns that while formalisation is happening, it must be reviewed to ensure it doesn’t become a death sentence for the industry. He encourages governments to adopt transparent, predictable tax models that allow for healthy business growth while still filling the state’s coffers. Overregulation, he warns, is just as dangerous as no regulation at all.

Finally, the issue of fairness remains central to a proactive regulatory future. Emmanuel Quainoo argues for a level playing field in which rules are enforced without exemptions. He points to the recent debates regarding the ban on using celebrities and influencers for marketing—a policy aimed at protecting youth from the glamorization of gambling.

Quainoo argues that what is good for the industry must be applied to everyone. When rules are applied inconsistently, they kill market diversity by squeezing out smaller operators who cannot afford to lose the same marketing tools used by their larger competitors.